Emerging states are culturally homogeneous. Their citizens act as single body and achieve success. As the states grow, they diversify and disaffected groups appear. There are two working strategies for dealing with such groups: eliminate the groups or their discontent. In the case of Red Indians, Americans chose to do away with the group; in the case of the blacks—the attempt is to deal with the discontent. Until the problem is solved, the groups are either oppressed (usually as a prelude to annihilation) or bribed into compliance with prevailing norms.

The examples of successful incorporation of discontent groups into the core population are dubious. Industrialized societies painfully incorporated landless peasants, but the peasants turned into workers without a change in economic status. The opportunities for occupational change were abundant and consistent with the prevailing work ethics of the peasants.

The examples of failed integration are many. The Russians failed to integrate the Caucasian nations, and it remains doubtful whether the Americans can integrate their blacks. Under the thin veil of mutual acceptance, the whites remain suspicious and the blacks—resentful. Affirmative action evolved into preferential treatment, but underscored the differences in culture and achievement rather than alleviated them. The inner cities became a hotbed of discontent which do not erupt into insurrection only because political dominance won’t provide the blacks with more than they enjoy under affirmative action.

America has had little problem with discontent groups because of the ample economic opportunities. A technological economy is different. It requires skills far beyond a mere willingness to work hard. A culture of learning is not acquired in a single generation. The grandchildren of Mexican immigrants would not generally take high-paying jobs in technological sectors. Entrepreneurship is paramount to success in America; that venue is now open mostly to skilled and educated (even if informally) people. Equal opportunity is a legal fiction in multi-culturalist society. Discontent builds up and stratifies.

The success of integration depends on the will of the targeted minority. The problem is, minorities often don’t want to integrate. Social matters are second only to economic matters. Disaffected people accept cultural integration, which gives them indispensable economic opportunities. As they progress in economic terms, they want to re-establish their roots. The professed multiculturalism of liberal societies promotes the attitude of de-integration. The re-discovery of cultural roots could be superficial (Reform Jews) or violent (fundamentalist Muslims). The value one attaches to economic opportunities determines the degree of isolation from mainstream society. A shadow of Jewishness satisfies money-loving and able American Jews; they don’t want to sacrifice economic opportunities for cultural values. On other end of the spectrum, Middle East Muslims lack economic opportunities and fully embrace their culture instead, refusing to integrate into a world dominated by Western mentality. The same process is evident with regard to the American blacks. Some, exemplified by Michael Jackson and Condoleezza Rice, eagerly abandon their race in pursuit of material opportunities; others, stuck in the inner cities, base their self-respect on their cultural roots. Few examples of accomplished integration are highly visible; the majority example is hidden behind the inner cities’ borders.

Arab villages in Israel are much more impenetrable to Jews than the inner cities are to White Americans. Besides a handful of the idyllic Arab villages for tourists, most are practically closed to Jewish or foreign visitors. The army or police could quickly formalize the informal commonsense prohibition for tourist groups on the grounds of “unrest.” That formulation, which implies extraordinary circumstances, describes a very ordinary situation of extreme, actionable hostility on the part of some (Arab) Israeli citizens toward others (Jewish). Could the Jews hope to integrate the Arabs into Israeli society? We might hope they could, of course, but that hope would be unrealistic.

Israeli Arabs know that they cannot compete with Jews economically. Every society the Jews have lived in has complained about the Jewish sway. If the Jews prospered despite discrimination, how much more would we prosper in a Jewish state? If the Jews prospered compared to highly educated European nations or workaholic Americans, how much more would we prosper relative to the Arabs, who lack both the work ethic and the culture of learning? Arabs are economically doomed in a Jewish state, and have to resort to nationalism and religion as sources of self-esteem. Integration is economically hopeless for them; separation into the ivory tower of Islam is soothing. Separation also brings economic benefits. Unemployed and hostile, Arabs are assured of the Jewish state’s assistance. More hostility brings them more assistance to bribe them into placidity.

Israel struggles against the trend toward ethnic-blind states. It is the last reasonable, ethnic-minded Western state, a place for neighbors rather a circus of aliens. Germany, whose people have become corrupted by welfare, is full of Turks. France, full of admiration for the Algerians that defeated it, opened wide the door to Muslims. Idealistic America floods itself with Blacks, Mexicans, and Chinese. Multiculturalism creates discord. The core population sees that the government is not for their people or by their people, and the government is discredited. Internal discord is sown, and the states break from within.